John and Vera Whiting, of Charles Road, Kingskerswell, write:

The massive objection to the Charles Road site was totally ignored at the planning meeting – councillors were more concerned with the promise of £250,000 from Cavanna and having land in the five year land bank.

Of course people need homes but they do need to be in the right place, why should we have our very quiet road turned into access for 60 homes? Or worse still, turned into a rat-run if the other development is allowed to link through from Fluder Hill.

We bought this bungalow because of the open situation and the quiet no-through road. In our house-hunting we purposely dismissed properties in family-suitable areas as we wanted a quiet retirement. We have brought up our family and have lived in a neighbourhood with children – now was the time to move on from that.

Are you as a council at all interested in any of your existing residents or only in the gain to your coffers – whether directly financial or from the extra council tax etc?

There is a flaw in the present legislation that requires a development to have a percentage of affordable homes; not all sites are suitable for a variety of reasons. We do wonder why such a large number of new houses are needed in the area when it was recently highlighted in the media that there are many applicants for every job. Are these houses going to be for people currently living in the area or are they going to be filled from overcrowded distant urban areas as has happened in other Devon towns?

This legislation appears to fuel the greed of developers who have become happy to build houses in smaller and smaller areas – of course they are not going to complain. Cavanna originally built the properties in Charles Road – they were obviously happy with the income at that time but are totally disinterested in the effect their large development will now have on the residents.

In the press dated October 22, 2011, Teignbridge district councillor Phillip Vogel said '... by planning to meet these needs we can make sure that we get the right development in the right places'. also 'we appreciate that any development plans can provoke passionate reactions on both sides and we're looking forward to having a full, frank and broad conversation with local people over the next few months'.

Fine, Cllr Vogel, but that does mean doing more than having a series of open days where people can look at a few plans – it should mean we have the opportunity for a real dialogue between the council and the residents.

Not only the human residents here will suffer – as we write this there are deer grazing in the field and pheasants strutting about, a buzzard circles overhead. Last summer we watched a pair of foxes raising their young.

The council's concern for the wildlife should be as much part of their green credentials as putting solar panels on the roof of the offices.

If such lovely open spaces are concreted over there will be little heritage of worth for anybody, two or four-legged.

We urge the council to take time to consider the needs of all the residents in the future of this area.THIS AND OTHER LETTERS IN OUR DIGITAL EDITION